No Lacuna for 8 years – For HH or ECL

GREED HAS SET IN TOO QUICKLY

No Lacuna for 8 years  –  For HH or ECL

It’s vey difficult to debate what the President said about a lacuna in the Constitution that allows one to serve an 8 year term instead of five years, because he did not specifically point out where that Lacuna is in the constitution.

The fact he even mentions 8 years makes it even more complicated. Really, I don’t know where the 8 years is coming from and that has left everyone guessing. Lets consider three possible scenario he might be  talking about.

Number One

I have seen the UPND pages trying to explain what he meant. That if a Presidential candidate resigns, dies or he’s disqualified after filling nominations but before Elections, Electoral commission must cancel all nominations and call for fresh elections within 30 days. Fresh nominations have to held every aftertime a candidate resigns, dies or he’s disqualified.

Meaning that if Presidental Candidates keep dying, resigning or disqualified then we may never have an election. Even this this scenario is extreme, because it can’t go on for three years to make it 8 years. Imagine a campaign period for three years and every after 30 days we are having fresh nomination because of resignation or death.

Even with that explanation it’s not possible,  ECZ have to hold the election within 90 days after dissolving Parliament. They can’t go beyond that because the constitution gives a speacfic date and month when the General elections should be held.

We had a simmilar case with the Malanji and Bowman cases. The ECZ went ahead to hold elections within the stipulated time of within 90 days. This was despite a an on going court and later even declared them fit to stand but it was too late the elections had past. So by precedence and the constitution it’s not possible.

Number 2

The second scenario is the Constitutional Court ruling, that the said 3 years is not a term in the case of ECL eligibility. Meaning a President can dissolve parliament just before three year and hold elections, if he wins he will be entitled to a fresh five years. Meaning he will be entitled to 8 years and it will considered a one term.

But if even that is wrong in the sense that there is another fact that determines a term; sworn in twice. Constitution defines a term by limiting a term to five years, with a maximum of 2 five terms and most importantly in this case sworn in twice. All the three items are what defines a term and should not be separated.

The best example is that you are allowed to marry for life but you can only get married twice in a life time. So even if you are allowed to marry for life but you can’t marry more than twice even in 3 or 8 years. The concourt simply said marrying for 3 years is not for life but did not mention the other part where you can’t be marey or sworn in more than twice.

The only reasons for calling for fresh nomination after a candidate resigns, dies or is disqualified is to allow the people or parties to have chance to field in another candidate they prefer. And I think it’s very intelligent and democratic; so that people are given an other choice.

Number 3

The third explanation might be that, the comment was meant for ECL. In the case court allows President Lungu to run in 2026 like in 2021 and this time he wins; He would have to served almost 12 years. The maximum limit has been 10 years from 1996. Elected twice 1996 and later changed 2016 to sworn in twice. He has been sworn in twice. Either cases the maximum is 10 years or sworn in twice. So I was shocked that ba Lungu was even quick to respond to him.

Whatever the case between the scenarios,  I think the constitution is okay on these issues but it’s being tested because of lack of human interigty and understanding blinded selfish personal needs. Like the bible says the law is meant for sinners.

The problem we usually have is that we have a compromised ConCourt and ECZ that are always trying to side with the party in power. The constitution is clear,  it’s sworn in twice with a MAXIMUM of 10 years split into two terms. No one should go beyond that, I was even shocked that concourt allowed ECL to stand in 2021.

No one is allowed to go beyond 5 years without an election, the constitution closed that loop by speacfically mentioning the date of elections. Beyond that it’s an illegal President.

The 2016 constitution also has closed the loophole that President can be calling for elections before three years and consider it not term by SWORN IN TWICe. So if calls for elections by dissolving Parliament before 3 years, he is shooting himself in the leg by cutting is term because of the sworn in twice.

I can write a book about this subject but no one is allowed to go beyond 5 years without an election whatever the case. And no one should be sworn in more than twice.

I submit

Nkonkomalimba Kapumpe